From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 13160 invoked by alias); 2 May 2008 14:16:53 -0000 Received: (qmail 12919 invoked by uid 48); 2 May 2008 14:16:03 -0000 Date: Fri, 02 May 2008 14:16:00 -0000 Message-ID: <20080502141603.12917.qmail@sourceware.org> X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC References: Subject: [Bug tree-optimization/32921] [4.3/4.4 Regression] Revision 126326 causes 12% slowdown In-Reply-To: Reply-To: gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org From: "mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org" Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org X-SW-Source: 2008-05/txt/msg00107.txt.bz2 ------- Comment #52 from mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-05-02 14:16 ------- Yes, the "perfect pass" problem is what concerns me too. For example, if we try to do dynamic reordering of passes, or allow users to specify that, we have to worry that, in practice, the compiler will crash or generate wrong code. We'll have no good way of ever validating even a small set of the possible combinations. Perhaps we need to make the passes fast, so we can run them more often? Or weave some of them together, even though of course it's nice if each pass is logically separate and does a single thing? -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32921